Standard Preanalytical Coding for Biospecimens: Review and Implementation of the Sample PREanalytical Code (SPREC)

Abstract

The first version of the Standard PREanalytical Code (SPREC) was developed in 2009 by the International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories (ISBER) Biospecimen Science Working Group to facilitate documentation and communication of the most important preanalytical quality parameters of different types of biospecimens used for research. This same Working Group has now updated the SPREC to version 2.0, presented here, so that it contains more options to allow for recent technological developments. Existing elements have been fine tuned. An interface to the Biospecimen Reporting for Improved Study Quality (BRISQ) has been defined, and informatics solutions for SPREC implementation have been developed. A glossary with SPREC-related definitions has also been added.

Method Validation for Preparing Urine Samples for Downstream Proteomic and Metabolomic Applications

“…21,36 Urine preanalytical conditions have been studied in specific proteomic methods including MALDI-TOF-MS, 37 2D-electrophoresis, 4 SELDITOF MS, 31 and LC-MS, 38 showing that collection and processing variables can have a major impact on specific proteins and peptides. In this context, laboratories and biobanks operating under accreditation are advised to track and record preanalytical data systematically using the Standard PREanalytical Code (SPREC), 39,40 while freeze-thaw cycles and other treatments (e.g., use of protease inhibitors, stabilizers) should be reported in the Laboratory Information Management System. Biobanks and clinical laboratories facing accreditation requirements and/or processing biospecimens for clinical biomarker research can implement the urine preparation methods presented here with reference to this publication.…”

U-CAN: a prospective longitudinal collection of biomaterials and clinical information from adult cancer patients in Sweden

“…The target time from patient to frozen aliquots was 2 h (max 4 h) and the actual time and sampling conditions were recorded for each sample. Preanalytical parameters were automatically recorded according to SPREC 2.0 [3] in the LIMS. The baseline sample package included EDTA plasma, serum, citrate plasma (until December 2014), and whole blood for DNA preparation (Table 2).…”

A critical analysis of cancer biobank practices in relation to biospecimen quality

“…The SPREC was updated in 2012, in response to user feedback and a broadening of its scope (Lehmann et al 2012), and is now incorporated, in compliance with the aim of the Biobanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure (BBMRI), into the Swedish data set MIABIS (Minimum Information About Biobank Information Sharing) (Norlin et al 2012) and interfaces with protocols submitted to the Molecular Methods Database (Klingström et al 2013). To facilitate biobank use of this coding system, two support tools have been developed for generating (SPRECalc) and encoding (SPRECware) relevant information (Lehmann et al 2012).…”

“…Reporting variables for the SPREC and BRISQ codes overlap somewhat, however the SPREC places greater focus on the biospecimen collection mechanism (Fig. 2) and includes a standardised method for reporting variables (Lehmann et al 2012). Conversely, the BRISQ encompasses more stages of the biospecimen timeline (Fig.…”

“…Both tools acknowledge that biobanks and/or researchers may not be able to report on an entire suite of variables due to procedural or logistical shortfalls (Lehmann et al 2012;Moore et al 2011Moore et al , 2012Moore et al , 2013Simeon-Dubach and Moore 2014). However, reporting on preanalytical variables where at all possible is purported to improve translational study outcomes (Simeon-Dubach and Moore 2014).…”